Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Project 2025: Part II

Project 2025: Part II

The inauguration of Donald Trump.

Getty Images / The Washington Post

Last spring and summer, The Fulcrum published a 30-part series on Project 2025.

For those of you not familiar with Project 2025, it is a playbook written in late 2024, specifically created for Donald Trump to use as a guideline for his first 180 days in office should he win the November election. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, proudly took credit for facilitating the creation of the 887-page documentary.


Project 2025’s two editors were assisted by 34 authors, 277 contributors, a 54-member advisory board, and a coalition of over 100 conservative organizations (including ALEC, The Heartland Institute, Liberty University, Middle East Forum, Moms for Liberty, the NRA, Pro-Life America and the Tea Party Patriots).

At the time, those from the left and the right were making assumptions about the meaning and impact of Project 2025. The Fulcrum felt a different approach was needed and proceeded to publish 30 columns over a three-month period, analyzing Project 2025 from a cross-partisan perspective, void of pre-determined left or right solutions. We felt this would serve as a guide for citizens and our elected representatives to ensure the healthy democratic republic we all desire.

Now that Trump has been Elected- Project 2025- Part II

Now that Donald Trump has been elected president, it is time for “Project 2025 Part II” to determine if last year's speculation as to what might be implemented from Project 2025 is actually being implemented or in the process of being implemented.

During his 2024 presidential campaign, then-candidate Trump distanced himself from the initiative, calling parts of it "ridiculous and abysmal". However, recently, he praised some aspects of the policy agenda, describing parts of it as "very conservative and very good".

Actions speak louder than words and despite his previous disavowals, many of Trump's early actions in his second term align with the Project 2025 agenda, including sweeping deregulation measures and aggressive immigration reform.

Already, the Trump administration has taken several actions that align with Project 2025. Here are a few notable examples:

  • Deregulation Measures: Trump has issued executive orders rolling back numerous regulations, which is a key component of Project 2025's agenda.
  • Immigration Reform: The administration has implemented stricter immigration policies, including measures to curb illegal immigration and enhance border security.
  • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Trump established a review council to advise on FEMA's ability to address disasters, echoing Project 2025's recommendation to shift more disaster response responsibilities to states.
  • Gender Policies: An executive order was signed, recognizing only two sexes, male and female, which aligns with Project 2025's stance on gender issues.

These actions reflect the influence of Project 2025's policy blueprint on Trump's administration, and starting soon, the Fulcrum will again publish detailed reports on each of the federal departments being impacted by Project 2025.

If we are to have a healthy and thriving democratic republic, we need a “Cross-Partisan Project 2025,” and as we did last summer, we will ask many important questions on the various components being implemented:

  • What's dividing Americans on critical issues?
  • Which information presented by Project 2025 is factual and to be trusted, and what is not?
  • What is oversimplified about Project 2025’s representation and perspective, and what is not? What are alternative solutions?
  • What do people from all sides of the political spectrum need to understand to address salient points of Project 2025 in a critical-thinking manner?
  • What are the questions nobody's asking?

We will, once again, explore the nuances and complexities of the subjects and issues covered in the implementation of components of the Project 2025 plan.

We will not shy away from Project 2025’s most controversial components and will call attention to dangerous thinking that threatens our democracy when we see it. However, in doing so, we are committing to not employing accusations, innuendos or misinformation. We will advocate for intellectual honesty to inform and persuade effectively.

The second phase of our Cross-Partisan Project 2025 series offers The Fulcrum a unique opportunity to provide reporting that banishes the old ways of demonizing “the other side.” We will be committed to implementing critical thinking, reexamining outdated assumptions, and using reason, scientific evidence, and data in formulating and testing public policy for 2025 and beyond. Our reporting and analysis will be based on a philosophy that seeks out diverse perspectives and experiences to find common ground.

Our nation needs to reshape our collective sense of civic responsibility, community building and political engagement. We must nurture new generations of thoughtful citizens and committed leaders who will promote a multidimensional approach to America's most important domestic and foreign policy issues.

That is the goal of Part II of “The Fulcrum’s Cross-Partisan Project 2025”

Samples of Phase 1 articles about Project 2025

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democratic Party Suicide
a piece of paper cut out of the shape of a donkey
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Democratic Party Suicide

A recent New York Times article, "Moderate Democrats Prepare for 'War' Against an Ascendant Left," describes a disturbing perspective among mainstream, moderate, centrist Democrats. It is disturbing for many reasons.

First, there is the practical impact. If indeed mainstream Democrats attack socialist Democrats in a sustained, organized manner, there is only one possible result: the defeat of the Party in 2026 and the renewed vigor of Trump and his MAGA allies. Especially when combined with the all-out effort that AIPAC will mostly take to support Republican candidates running against Democratic candidates who are socialists. (See my article, "The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC.")

Keep ReadingShow less
An Iranian flag and the message "No King" graffitied on the ruins of the data center building of Sharif University of Technology after a U.S.-Israeli missile strike on April 7, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

How has the meaning of military victory changed? Explore Iran, deterrence, nuclear weapons, and why modern wars are fought with limited objectives.

Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images

The Last War We Understood

Every modern conflict seems to produce the same debate.

Supporters argue that military action achieved its objectives. Critics ask why the enemy still exists. Iran is only the latest example.

Keep ReadingShow less